The Best of Two Worlds: A Systematic Review on Combining Real and Virtual Experiments in Science Education

IF 8.3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Review of Educational Research Pub Date : 2022-04-06 DOI:10.3102/00346543221079417
Salome Wörner, J. Kuhn, K. Scheiter
{"title":"The Best of Two Worlds: A Systematic Review on Combining Real and Virtual Experiments in Science Education","authors":"Salome Wörner, J. Kuhn, K. Scheiter","doi":"10.3102/00346543221079417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Conducting experiments fosters conceptual understanding in science education. In various studies, combinations of real (hands-on) and virtual (computer-simulated) experiments have been shown to be especially helpful for gaining conceptual understanding. The present systematic review, based on 42 experimental studies, focuses on the following: (1) What is the relative effectiveness of combining real and virtual experiments compared with a single type of experimentation? (2) Which sequence of real and virtual experiments is most effective? The results indicate that (1) in most cases combinations of real and virtual experiments promote conceptual understanding better than a single type of experimentation, and (2) there is no evidence for the superiority of a particular sequence. We conclude that for combining real and virtual experiments, apart from the individual affordances and the learning objectives of the different experiment types, especially their specific function for the learning task must be considered.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"911 - 952"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221079417","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Conducting experiments fosters conceptual understanding in science education. In various studies, combinations of real (hands-on) and virtual (computer-simulated) experiments have been shown to be especially helpful for gaining conceptual understanding. The present systematic review, based on 42 experimental studies, focuses on the following: (1) What is the relative effectiveness of combining real and virtual experiments compared with a single type of experimentation? (2) Which sequence of real and virtual experiments is most effective? The results indicate that (1) in most cases combinations of real and virtual experiments promote conceptual understanding better than a single type of experimentation, and (2) there is no evidence for the superiority of a particular sequence. We conclude that for combining real and virtual experiments, apart from the individual affordances and the learning objectives of the different experiment types, especially their specific function for the learning task must be considered.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两个世界的最佳选择:科学教育中真实实验与虚拟实验相结合的系统回顾
进行实验可以促进科学教育中的概念理解。在各种研究中,真实(动手)和虚拟(计算机模拟)实验的结合已被证明对获得概念理解特别有帮助。本系统综述基于42项实验研究,重点关注以下内容:(1)与单一类型的实验相比,将真实和虚拟实验相结合的相对有效性是什么?(2) 真实实验和虚拟实验的哪个序列最有效?结果表明:(1)在大多数情况下,真实和虚拟实验的组合比单一类型的实验更好地促进概念理解,(2)没有证据表明特定序列的优越性。我们得出的结论是,在结合真实实验和虚拟实验时,除了考虑不同实验类型的个体可供性和学习目标外,还必须考虑它们对学习任务的特定功能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Review of Educational Research
Review of Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
24.10
自引率
2.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Review of Educational Research (RER), a quarterly publication initiated in 1931 with approximately 640 pages per volume year, is dedicated to presenting critical, integrative reviews of research literature relevant to education. These reviews encompass conceptualizations, interpretations, and syntheses of scholarly work across fields broadly pertinent to education and educational research. Welcoming submissions from any discipline, RER encourages research reviews in psychology, sociology, history, philosophy, political science, economics, computer science, statistics, anthropology, and biology, provided the review addresses educational issues. While original empirical research is not published independently, RER incorporates it within broader integrative reviews. The journal may occasionally feature solicited, rigorously refereed analytic reviews of special topics, especially from disciplines underrepresented in educational research.
期刊最新文献
Development and Feasibility Pilot Study of Indigenous Recovery Planning: A Community-Engaged Approach to Addressing Substance Use in a Native Community. Multidimensional Framing of Environments Beyond Blocks and Texts in K–12 Programming Robots’ Social Behaviors for Language Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis The Emergence and Escalation of Online Racial Discrimination in Digital Spaces: A Systematic Review Assessing Teachers’ Culturally Responsive Classroom Practice in PK–12 Schools: A Systematic Review of Teacher-, Student-, and Observer-Report Measures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1